Oh My God! Roeder's Such An Idiot!!!

[Matt Morriss 69]

''''When I first came here I looked at it and we had the second worst

defensive record in the Championship, so you could see why we were down

there, though there were other reasons as well.“All we''ve tried

to do is tighten up a little bit, not just at the back but everywhere,

being harder to beat as a team, as a unit.''''Butters..God Roeder was such a failure, i said at the start of the season the defence was poor and was the reason we were struggling. Why is it Roeder failed to recognise this fact and Butters acknowledged it the second he got to the club.It was obvious for so long that the defence needed sorting, Roeder never did it.

[Gingerpele 0]

what was Cave-Brown like, i though i saw him in a reserve game or two, and thought he was good, why did he leave, couldnt have done worse than semmy

[AJ 1,218]

[quote user="Ginger Pele"]what was Cave-Brown like, i though i saw him in a reserve game or two, and thought he was good, why did he leave, couldnt have done worse than semmy [/quote]A bit harsh, I don''t think Semmy has been great this year, but then neither has Bertrand.

[Gingerpele 0]

I just think Semmy hasnt done this season what he did last season, and Cave-Brown got released by Roeder didnt he? and i thought he could have been an ok right back. I think the same with Bertrand this season, much better last season, Drury should have got more chance to play, his career could be over if we get Bertrand in permanetly

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

To be fair, I think Roeder would have known that our biggest weakness was our defense. He did bring in quite a few defenders.

He just didn’t have the man manageability (if that’s a word) to do anything about it

[Binky 0]

This thread is so unfair. Look at Lappin - brilliant on Saturday - do you think he would have played like that if Roeder hadn''t rested him for 16 months? And Shackell - Roeder knew the value of loan players alright and if it hadn''t been for Roeder selling him to Wolves in the first place, we could never have had him back on loan could we? And by appointing Fotheringham as captain, he made it so much easier for Gunn to make important changes. I could go on... Oh yes - he also got a good pay-off when he left us - hardly the performance of an idiot you know.

[JJ 0]

[quote user="Ginger Pele"]I just think Semmy hasnt done this season what he did last season, and Cave-Brown got released by Roeder didnt he? and i thought he could have been an ok right back. I think the same with Bertrand this season, much better last season, Drury should have got more chance to play, his career could be over if we get Bertrand in permanetly
[/quote]

I think the thing that Roeder got wrong with Bertrand was that he kept playing him week in week out regardless of how badly he was performing.   The guy clearly needed dropping or a rest and its clear that a spell out of the team (since Gunny arrived) may have done him some good.

However, I will defend Roeder when it comes to Cave-Brown and Drury.  The former is not pulling up trees at Leyton Orient right now.  The latter sadly, has not been at the races for several seasons due to injury and loss of form.  I''m beginning to wonder if he''ll ever get back to his best.

 

[Matt Morriss 69]

[quote user="Binky"]This thread is so unfair. Look at Lappin - brilliant on Saturday - do you think he would have played like that if Roeder hadn''t rested him for 16 months? And Shackell - Roeder knew the value of loan players alright and if it hadn''t been for Roeder selling him to Wolves in the first place, we could never have had him back on loan could we? And by appointing Fotheringham as captain, he made it so much easier for Gunn to make important changes. I could go on... Oh yes - he also got a good pay-off when he left us - hardly the performance of an idiot you know.[/quote]is this a joke? your post is absolute drivel.

[Mr. Bump 0]

Roeder was a defender himself, but please don''t mention him I''d forgotten all about him.

[Robert N. LiM 4,336]

Certainly playing two recognised centre-halves at centre half seems to be a better idea than playing one centre half and a full back.Just as playing a centre-forward up front seems to be a better idea than playing a central midfielder.It''s a simple game.The interview is very interesting - much more open and revealing than many interviews with managers/coaches.

[Robert N. LiM 4,336]

[quote user="Barclayman"] is this a joke? your post is absolute drivel.[/quote]bless

[|BA 0]

[quote user="Barclayboy"][quote user="Binky"]This thread is so unfair. Look at Lappin - brilliant on Saturday - do you think he would have played like that if Roeder hadn''t rested him for 16 months? And Shackell - Roeder knew the value of loan players alright and if it hadn''t been for Roeder selling him to Wolves in the first place, we could never have had him back on loan could we? And by appointing Fotheringham as captain, he made it so much easier for Gunn to make important changes. I could go on... Oh yes - he also got a good pay-off when he left us - hardly the performance of an idiot you know.[/quote]is this a joke? your post is absolute drivel.[/quote]If you need that explaining to you then its time for school young ''un.... Sarcasm. Ask your teacher

[Bobert 0]

[quote user="Binky"]This thread is so unfair. Look at Lappin - brilliant on Saturday - do you think he would have played like that if Roeder hadn''t rested him for 16 months? And Shackell - Roeder knew the value of loan players alright and if it hadn''t been for Roeder selling him to Wolves in the first place, we could never have had him back on loan could we? And by appointing Fotheringham as captain, he made it so much easier for Gunn to make important changes. I could go on... Oh yes - he also got a good pay-off when he left us - hardly the performance of an idiot you know.
[/quote]

Maybe one of you dinky die soccer players will tell me why you think Lapin was "brilliant" on Saturday. I thought, at least in the first half, he lacked just about everything. He stood off instead of taking on his man, he called for the ball when he was in no position to do anything with it, he waved his hands about like the good fairy and the Birmingham goal came as a result of him being disposesed in his own area of the field. Maybe in the second half he played better as I did not see too much of him being on the other side of the field from me, but in general terms he seems such a light weight,

[|BA 0]

First of all Barclayboy be in no doubt that Roeder has forgotten more about football than you will ever know. Anyone outside the inner sanctum has probably 5% knowledge of whats going on at the club regarding player form, injuries, personality clashes, contract talks, investment, coaching methods.... even the arguments about car parking arrangements.As far as the big picture goes, you and I know nothing. Media fed snippets form a very manipulated public opinion.This is true of football clubs, governments,  any organisation.So to say Roeder is an idiot is......idiotic. He had great respect amongst the squad (as was shown by the reaction when he was fired). Paul Stephenson was the best reserve / yoof coach we''ve had in 20 years. Clarkey was a great foil to Roeders style of management and was a tough loss to recover from. Personally given the choice, I''d take the current team especially if the stories of Gunns replacement in the summer are true, that would be a dream ticket for all fans.Having a defensive coach is a great asset. When my son played 15 years ago they had a defensive coach (ex pro of great experience) at the club and without doubt its a great option to instill the absolute basics into players that people tend to assume should already know them (Shackell). I''ve seen under 10''s play with frightening organisation at the back, its not difficult. Indeed it became such a concern a few years ago that the basics were not being addressed (Wilkinson found this during his caretaker role for England) that it became the priority at the FA coaching schools. from this a series of VHS tapes were made available called "Defending to Win". I suggest anyone who thought Shackell was playing well before his departure to Wolves get a copy and watch it. Roeder is no idiot. He is a great manager who had to deal with exceptional problems at the club when he arrived. He was still dealing with an element of this 15 months later. He knew the size of the task and faced it head on knowing his chances of success were slim. You can get a little insight into what really goes on in football by reading a few biographies..... except Iwans  LOL. Dont bother with anyone still in football especially still playing. Peter Swans is good, Howard Kendall not bad. But even then, dont believe evrything you read, you''re hearing an opinion of events, not a factual account. You seem to confuse the two with many of your posts

[|BA 0]

[quote user="IBA"](Shackell). you''re hearing an opinion of events, not a factual account. [/quote]Sorry I should have said not ''necessarily'' a factual account.

[Binky 0]

Barclayman asked of Binky''s post: "is this a joke? your post is absolute drivel."

No. What he did to the club and what he got paid to go away (ie allegedly. the rest of his contract)  - was certainly no joke.

[Binky 0]

IBA - whilst we could argue all day on your contention that "Roeder is a great manager" (let''s wait until/if he gets a new position) - right now I''m enjoying just waking up and smelling the coffee. It''s not just that we''re getting good results right when they are needed - it is the way we are playing that is so important. Didn''t play well at QPR by all accounts - but a great performance and result. Thankfully I didn''t go to Blackpool. But Cardiff (OK they made it easy for us) and Plymouth and Birmingham have produced some really good football. I do not believe we saw anything remotely as good or as attractive under GR.I believe creativity is every bit as important as do or die battling right now - and the current first team squad has that creativity and is beginning to flourish. Long may it continue.

[Hairy Canary 698]

[quote user="IBA"]
You can get a little insight into what really goes on in football by reading a few biographies..... except Iwans  LOL. Dont bother with anyone still in football especially still playing. Peter Swans is good, Howard Kendall not bad. But even then, dont believe evrything you read, you''re hearing an opinion of events, not a factual account. You seem to confuse the two with many of your posts
[/quote]

Try Kenny Samson''s book - his opinion of Roeder is much nearer to Barclaymans than yours.

[Matt Morriss 69]

[quote user="IBA"]First of all Barclayboy be in no doubt that Roeder has forgotten more about football than you will ever know. Anyone outside the inner sanctum has probably 5% knowledge of whats going on at the club regarding player form, injuries, personality clashes, contract talks, investment, coaching methods.... even the arguments about car parking arrangements.As far as the big picture goes, you and I know nothing. Media fed snippets form a very manipulated public opinion.This is true of football clubs, governments,  any organisation.So to say Roeder is an idiot is......idiotic. He had great respect amongst the squad (as was shown by the reaction when he was fired). Paul Stephenson was the best reserve / yoof coach we''ve had in 20 years. Clarkey was a great foil to Roeders style of management and was a tough loss to recover from. Personally given the choice, I''d take the current team especially if the stories of Gunns replacement in the summer are true, that would be a dream ticket for all fans.Having a defensive coach is a great asset. When my son played 15 years ago they had a defensive coach (ex pro of great experience) at the club and without doubt its a great option to instill the absolute basics into players that people tend to assume should already know them (Shackell). I''ve seen under 10''s play with frightening organisation at the back, its not difficult. Indeed it became such a concern a few years ago that the basics were not being addressed (Wilkinson found this during his caretaker role for England) that it became the priority at the FA coaching schools. from this a series of VHS tapes were made available called "Defending to Win". I suggest anyone who thought Shackell was playing well before his departure to Wolves get a copy and watch it. Roeder is no idiot. He is a great manager who had to deal with exceptional problems at the club when he arrived. He was still dealing with an element of this 15 months later. He knew the size of the task and faced it head on knowing his chances of success were slim. You can get a little insight into what really goes on in football by reading a few biographies..... except Iwans  LOL. Dont bother with anyone still in football especially still playing. Peter Swans is good, Howard Kendall not bad. But even then, dont believe evrything you read, you''re hearing an opinion of events, not a factual account. You seem to confuse the two with many of your posts[/quote]Ha ha what utter crap. I was reading your reply with an objective opinion as i always do until you said Roeder is a great manager. Exceptional problems? Those problems are still here and Gunn and co seems to have done ''exceptionally well'' in the short time theyve been in charge. And Roeder was still dealing with those problems 15 months on? Dont make me laugh, the problems were his own doing!!! Like getting rid of Hucks, not getting a recognised striker and messing up the defence and never repairing it.You seem to have read a few autobiographies which you think makes you some sort of authority which is a joke. Im well aware that we dont know half the story that goes on, which is why i never post about off field topics and rumours because i have no clue simply. I post my opinions on what i know most about. How the team performs on the pitch.Lastly i confuse fact and opinion with many of my posts? Complete rubbish. This post is my opinion on Roeders failure to recognise our problems all season lay with the defence. Of course i have sensationalised it with the Roeder''s an idiot headline. Of course he isnt an idiot, any man that can garner managers roles for professional football clubs and earn the money he has obviously isnt an idiot.The point is the defence has been a shambles all season, Roeder''s fault, and he never sorted it or attempted to. Gunn comes in and bam, clean sheets and 3 points. And Butters comments that he recognised the problem the first day he was here speaks volumes for me.

[|BA 0]

You think he didn''t recognise the defence was a problem. Ok....you''re right....explains why he didn''t bring in any defenders. .... seems to me he replaced the lot..... Berty, Taylor, Ozzie, Kennedy. So you cant say he didn''t recognise there was a problem. You can say he didn''t fix it.... fair enough.Dont take my word about him being a great Manager, ask 90% of players who have played for him. Just dont ask what they think of his coaching....LOL.... thats why LC was a big loss. He did erradicate most of the problem he inherited, I''m not talking about players, more about the lifestyle habits rife at the time. They say Clive Woodward was the greates England Rugby ''manager'' - ''head coach'' - whatever. yet he couldn''t coach. He couldn''t motivate. He COULD delegate. That alone makes a great manager.I''ve read biographys sure, my best mate played for Brentford and Derby (still a coach there - good stories about PJ) so have a great interest in the closed side of the game. I''m no authority, but I know what i know.And you ALWAYS confuse opinion and fact.I''ll agree 100% that Butterworth seems to have made a fantastic difference. Excellent appointment. Well done the board. [:D]

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="Barclayman"][quote user="Binky"]This thread is so unfair. Look at Lappin - brilliant on Saturday - do you think he would have played like that if Roeder hadn''t rested him for 16 months? And Shackell - Roeder knew the value of loan players alright and if it hadn''t been for Roeder selling him to Wolves in the first place, we could never have had him back on loan could we? And by appointing Fotheringham as captain, he made it so much easier for Gunn to make important changes. I could go on... Oh yes - he also got a good pay-off when he left us - hardly the performance of an idiot you know.[/quote]is this a joke? your post is absolute drivel.[/quote]I see the humour bypass was a complete success.

[grantroederdisaster 0]

I''m amazed that you''ve only just worked out what Mr Roedernowhere is like!!

 

Bad part of our great clubs history that thankfully is over!

[Matt Morriss 69]

[quote user="grantroederdisaster"]

I''m amazed that you''ve only just worked out what Mr Roedernowhere is like!!

 

Bad part of our great clubs history that thankfully is over!

[/quote]haha, no i knew full well, its just what Butters said reminded me!

[Matt Morriss 69]

[quote user="MonkeyTrousers"][quote user="Barclayman"][quote user="Binky"]This thread is so unfair. Look at Lappin - brilliant on Saturday - do you think he would have played like that if Roeder hadn''t rested him for 16 months? And Shackell - Roeder knew the value of loan players alright and if it hadn''t been for Roeder selling him to Wolves in the first place, we could never have had him back on loan could we? And by appointing Fotheringham as captain, he made it so much easier for Gunn to make important changes. I could go on... Oh yes - he also got a good pay-off when he left us - hardly the performance of an idiot you know.[/quote]is this a joke? your post is absolute drivel.[/quote]I see the humour bypass was a complete success.[/quote]i know i know. missed that one, yesterday was a hard day!

[John Boubepo 0]

I agree I don''t think Roeder was an idiot, just totally incompetent, I

would go as far as saying, he did more damage to the club, the

relationship with the fans, the confidence/respect of the

players/reserves/kids, the overall future of the club, than either

Grant or Hamilton. Roeders team couldn''t defend, couldn''t score goals,

couldn''t control midfield even when he played 6 across the middle, gave

away penalties, lost against 10 men several times, he lost the dressing

room, sold our best player [no, he let him walk away for free] lost the

fans, lost the press, lost game after game with bad management skills,

poor tactical skills, poor substitutions etc etc etc, not to mention

his arrogance, self importance and ignorance - come to think of it,

perhaps he was an idiot!

[Shyster 0]

Roeder is no idiot - it''s the people who''ve employed him over the years that are idiots.

[GeeBee 0]

Groeder, a "great manager". Please don''t be gross. In fact go to school, boy, wash your mouth out with soapy water and stand in the naughty corner, because that is just a barefaced lie.Looking at the stats behind the statements, you''ll find that Groeder''s managerial record boasts a rather uninspiring 1.35 points per game, which is boosted by a healthy average of 1.7 when he was at Newcastle. Otherwise you''ll find he was nearer 1.15 with us and Watford etc. But let''s take 1.35 and then have a look at when he won most of them. Almost always in the first season at each club is the answer. He''s always had a second season slump which tends to lose him his job, and you''d expect that this is due to the squad and fans getting fed up with his abrasive and irritating ways. Ask West Ham fans, they don''t exactly hold Groeder close to their collective heart.So where would we be (taking this average) if Groeder had not been fired. We''d be on 54 points, in 12th position in the Championship. Sound good? Well, it is at least safe. However, we are overlooking the fact that we were suffering his normal second season slump and so that average (of 1.34) should no longer be used; indeed nor should his overall Canary average of 1.15. But we''re using this average to keep the message simple: Groeder is not a great manager. Great managers average more than 1.35 points game - a return that reaks of midtable at best. Or are we saying that Gunny''s average of 1.31 points per game makes him almost great? If so, we can look forward to midtable security next season. Hurrah!

[Houston Canary 0]

[quote user="GeeBee"]Groeder, a "great manager". Please don''t be gross. In fact go to school, boy, wash your mouth out with soapy water and stand in the naughty corner, because that is just a barefaced lie.

Looking at the stats behind the statements, you''ll find that Groeder''s managerial record boasts a rather uninspiring 1.35 points per game, which is boosted by a healthy average of 1.7 when he was at Newcastle. Otherwise you''ll find he was nearer 1.15 with us and Watford etc. But let''s take 1.35 and then have a look at when he won most of them. Almost always in the first season at each club is the answer. He''s always had a second season slump which tends to lose him his job, and you''d expect that this is due to the squad and fans getting fed up with his abrasive and irritating ways. Ask West Ham fans, they don''t exactly hold Groeder close to their collective heart.

So where would we be (taking this average) if Groeder had not been fired. We''d be on 54 points, in 12th position in the Championship. Sound good? Well, it is at least safe. However, we are overlooking the fact that we were suffering his normal second season slump and so that average (of 1.34) should no longer be used; indeed nor should his overall Canary average of 1.15. But we''re using this average to keep the message simple: Groeder is not a great manager. Great managers average more than 1.35 points game - a return that reaks of midtable at best.

Or are we saying that Gunny''s average of 1.31 points per game makes him almost great? If so, we can look forward to midtable security next season. Hurrah!


[/quote]

Some people like to be contrarian for the sake of being contrarian.  Nobody with any semblance of football knowledge thinks Roeder is a great manager.  He has proven repeatedly that he can save a team from relegation once and nothing more.

[king canary 7,604]

As has been pointed out earlier on the thread you cant say Roeder didnt identify the problem- he bought in a totally new CB pariing in Kennedy and Stef andh is first signing was a big commanding center half. However his record with the defense was poor, if unlucky interms of the amount of injuries suffered. A fully fit back 4 of Semmy, Stef, Kennedy and Bertrand when on form is easily good enough for this division. His problem was sticking with Omozuzi despite his shocking inconsitency and refusing to drop Bertrand no matter how he played. As I''m sure others have said before Roeder strikes me as a perfect chief scout/ director of football where man managment skills are of no importance. He is capeable of identifiing talent, just not capeable of putting them into a coherant unit. However I doubt his ego would allow him to take a role that far in the background these days.

[|BA 0]

[quote user="Houston Canary"]

Some people like to be contrarian for the sake of being contrarian.  Nobody with any semblance of football knowledge thinks Roeder is a great manager. 

[/quote]Arsene Wenger